Are the systems the same?

References

1. Agostini, Tainara D. and Scott A. Schwenter
   2018 “Variable Negative Concord in Brazilian Portuguese: Acceptability and Frequency.” InContemporary Trends in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics: Selected Papers from the Hispanic Linguistics Symposium 2015, ed. byJonathan E. MacDonald, 71–94. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ihll.15.05ago
   https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.15.05ago [Google Scholar]
2. Arjona, Marina
   1990 “El adverbio muy y otros intensificadores en el habla popular de México.” Anuario de Letras28: 75–96.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Batllori, Montserrat and M. Lluïsa Hernanz
   2009 “En torno a la polaridad enfática en español y en catalán: un estudio diacrónico y comparativo.” InDiachronic Linguistics, ed. byJoan Rafel, 319–352. Girona: Documenta Universitaria.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Batllori, Montserrat and M. Lluïsa Hernanz
   2013 “Emphatic Polarity Particles in Spanish and Catalan.” Lingua128: 9–30. 10.1016/j.lingua.2012.11.010
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.11.010 [Google Scholar]
5. Birdsong, David, Libby M. Gertken, and Mark Amengual
   2012 Bilingual Language Profile: An Easy-to-Use Instrument to Assess Bilingualism. COERLL, University of TexasatAustin. Web. 20Jan. 2012 <https://sites.la.utexas.edu/bilingual/.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Blas Arroyo, José Luis
   2004 “El español actual en las comunidades del ámbito lingüístico catalán.” InHistoria de la lengua española, ed. byRafael Cano Aguilar, 1065–1086. Barcelona: Ariel.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Blas Arroyo, José Luis
   2008 “The Variable Expression of Future Tense in Peninsular Spanish: The Present (and Future) of Inflectional Forms in the Spanish Spoken in a Bilingual Region.” Language Variation and Change20: 85–126. 10.1017/S095439450800001X
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S095439450800001X [Google Scholar]
8. Blas Arroyo, José Luis
   2011 “Spanish in Contact with Catalan.” InThe Handbook of Hispanic Sociolinguistics, ed. byManuel Díaz-Campos, 374–394. Malden, MA: Oxford-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444393446.ch18
   https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444393446.ch18 [Google Scholar]
9. Brown, Esther L. and Mayra Cortés-Torres
   2013 “Puerto Rican Intensifiers: Bien/muy variables.” InSelected Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics, ed. byAna Maria Carvalho and Sara Beaudrie, 11–19. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Bybee, Joan
    2006 “From Usage to Grammar: The Mind’s Response to Repetition.” Language82: 711–733. 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
11. Bybee, Joan
    2010 Language, Usage, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
12. Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins, and William Pagliuca
    1994 The Evolution of Grammar: The Grammaticalization of Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Cuenca, Maria-Josep and Marín, Maria-Josep
    2009 “Co-occurrence of Discourse Markers in Catalan and Spanish Oral Narrative.” Journal of Pragmatics41: 899–914. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.08.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.08.010 [Google Scholar]
14. Ellis, Nick C. and Stefanie Wulff
    2015 “Usage-based Approaches to SLA.” InTheories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction (2nd ed.), ed. byBill VanPatten & Jessica Williams, 75–93. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Enrique-Arias, Andrés
    2010 “On Language Contact as an Inhibitor of Language Change.” InContinuity and Change in Grammar, ed. byAnne Breitbarth, Christopher Lucas, Sheila Watts, and David Willis, 97–117. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.159.05enr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.159.05enr [Google Scholar]
16. Geeslin, Kimberly L.
    2003 “A Comparison of Copula Choice in Advanced and Native Spanish.” Language Learning53: 703–764. 10.1046/j.1467‑9922.2003.00240.x
    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-9922.2003.00240.x [Google Scholar]
17. Goffman, Erving
    1981 Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Gutiérrez, Manuel
    1995 “On the Future of the Future Tense in the Spanish of the Southwest.” InSpanish in Four Continents: Studies in Language Contact and Bilingualism, ed. byCarmen Silva-Corvalán, 214–223. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Haspelmath, Martin
    2014 “The Three Adnominal Possessive Constructions in Egyptian-Coptic: Three Degrees of Grammaticalization.” InEgyptian-Coptic Linguistics in Typological Perspective, ed. byMartin Haspelmath, Eitan Grossman, and Tonio S. Richter, 262–285. Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Haspelmath, Martin and Andrea D. Sims
    2010 Understanding Morphology (2nd ed.). London: Hodder Education.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Hernanz, M. Lluïsa
    1995 Bien y la polaridad positiva en español. Estudio inédito.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Hernanz, M. Lluïsa
    2010 “Assertive Bien in Spanish and the Left Periphery.” InMapping the Left Periphery: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 5, ed. byPaola Benincà & Nicola Munaro, 19–62. New York: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Institut d’Estudis Catalans
    Institut d’Estudis Catalans 2017 Gramàtica de la llengua catalana. Barcelona: Institut d’Estudis Catalans.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Ito, Rika and Sali Tagliamonte
    2003 “Well Weird, Right Dodgy, Very Strange, Really Cool: Layering and Recycling in English Intensifiers.” Language in Society32: 257–279. 10.1017/S0047404503322055
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404503322055 [Google Scholar]
25. Johnson, Daniel E.
    2009 “Getting off the Goldvarb Standard: Introducing Rbrul for Mixed-Effects Variable Rule Analysis.” Language and Linguistics Compass3: 359–383. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2008.00108.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00108.x [Google Scholar]
26. Kanwit, Matthew, Virginia Terán, and Silvia Pisabarro Sarrió
    2017 “Un fenómeno bien curioso: New Methods for Analyzing Variable Intensification Across Four Dialects of Spain and Argentina.” Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics10: 259–295. 10.1515/shll‑2017‑0008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/shll-2017-0008 [Google Scholar]
27. Klee, Carol A. and Andrew Lynch
    2009 El español en contacto con otras lenguas. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Labov, William
    1978 “Where Does the Linguistic Variable Stop? A Response to Beatriz Lavandera.” InWorking Papers in Sociolinguistics (Vol.44). Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Labov, William
    2001 Principles of Linguistic Change, vol. 2: Social Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Lavandera, Beatriz R.
    1978 “Where Does the Sociolinguistic Variable Stop?” Language in Society7: 171–182. 10.1017/S0047404500005510
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005510 [Google Scholar]
31. Meyerhoff, Miriam
    2009 “Replication, Transfer, and Calquing: Using Variation as a Tool in the Study of Language Contact.” Language Variation and Change21: 297–317. 10.1017/S0954394509990196
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394509990196 [Google Scholar]
32. Poplack, Shana and Sali Tagliamonte
    2001 African American English in the Diaspora. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Pradilla, Miquel Ángel
    2001 “The Catalan-speaking Communities.” InMultinguialism in Spain: Sociolinguistic and Psycholinguistic Aspects of Linguistic Minority Groups, ed. byM. Teresa Turell, 58–90. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Romaine, Suzanne
    1984 “On the Problem of Syntactic Variation and Pragmatic Meaning in Sociolinguistic Theory.” Folia Linguistica18: 409–437. 10.1515/flin.1984.18.3‑4.409
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.1984.18.3-4.409 [Google Scholar]
35. Salvador Salvador, Francisco
    1987 “La gradación adjetiva en el habla popular de Ciudad de México.” Actas del I Congreso Internacional del Español de América, 419–430. San Juan de Puerto Rico: Academia Puertorriqueña de la Lengua Española.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Sankoff, David and Pierrette Thibault
    1981 “Weak Complementarity: Tense and Aspect in Montreal French.” InSyntactic Change, ed. byBrenda B. Johns and David R. Strong, 206–216. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Sankoff, David, Shana Poplack, and Swathi Vanniarajan
    1990 “The Case of the Nonce Loan in Tamil.” Language Variation and Change2: 71–101. 10.1017/S0954394500000272
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000272 [Google Scholar]
38. Sankoff, Gillian
    1973 “Above and Beyond Phonology in Variable Rules.” InNew Ways of Analyzing Variation in English, ed. byCharles-James N. Bailey and Roger W. Shuy, 44–61. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Schwenter, Scott A. and Rena Torres Cacoullos
    2008 “Defaults and Indeterminacy in Temporal Grammaticalization: The “Perfect” Road to Perfective.” Language Variation and Change20: 1–39. 10.1017/S0954394508000057
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394508000057 [Google Scholar]
40. Sedano, Mercedes
    2002–2004 “Este tema es muy/bien interesante.” Archivo de filología aragonesa59–60: 859–873.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Serradilla Castaño, Ana
    2006 “Bien + adjetivo como perífrasis de superlativo en español. Particularidades semánticas y sintácticas.” Verba33: 215–233.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Tagliamonte, Sali
    2008 “So Different and Pretty Cool! Recycling Intensifiers in Toronto, Canada.” English Language and Linguistics12: 361–394. 10.1017/S1360674308002669
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674308002669 [Google Scholar]
43. Tagliamonte, Sali
    2012 Variationist Sociolinguistics: Change, Observation, Interpretation. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Torres Cacoullos, Rena and Catherine E. Travis
    2010 “Testing Convergence via Code-Switching: Priming and the Structure of Variable Subject Expression.” International Journal of Bilingualism15: 241–262. 10.1177/1367006910371025
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006910371025 [Google Scholar]
45. Vann, Robert E.
    1998 “Pragmatic Transfer from Less developed to More Developed Systems: Spanish Deictic Terms in Barcelona.” InRomance Linguistics: Theoretical Perspectives, ed. byArmin Schwegler, Bernard Tranel, and Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria, 307–318. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.160.22van
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.160.22van [Google Scholar]